Sunday, September 29, 2013

The Under-reporting of Accidental Shooting Deaths

The police investigation report in the Cassie Culpepper case indicates that her brother, Nicholas, shot her accidentally. But the state medical examiner classified her death as a homicide, a common practice for unintentional firearm deaths in which one person shoots another.The New York TimesA New York Times review of hundreds of child firearm deaths found that accidental shootings occurred roughly twice as often as the records indicate, because of idiosyncrasies in how such deaths are classified by the authorities. The killings of Lucas, Cassie and Alex, for instance, were not recorded as accidents. Nor were more than half of the 259 accidental firearm deaths of children under age 15 identified by The Times in eight states where records were available.

As a result, scores of accidental killings are not reflected in the official statistics that have framed the debate over how to protect children from guns.

The National Rifle Association cited the lower official numbers this year in a fact sheet opposing “safe storage” laws, saying children were more likely to be killed by falls, poisoning or environmental factors — an incorrect assertion if the actual number of accidental firearm deaths is significantly higher.

In all, fewer than 20 states have enacted laws to hold adults criminally liable if they fail to store guns safely, enabling children to access them.

26 comments:

The major newspaper in Minnesote ran the article with this title, "Rate of kids' gun deaths could be twice what's reported" which seems to suggest that some deaths are left out. But when you read the article, you discover that the death is still being reported, but is misclassified. So accidents are being underreported, and homicides are being over reported. And this at a time when homicides are still dropping.

As Sarge said, the numbers may need shifting around a bit, but the total is the same. It's not as though these deaths are being attributed to alien abduction or that people are burying the bodies in the woods and telling no one. And Mikeb, you put your faith in law enforcement to control guns, but you keep pointing out cases where such government employees screw up. I'm still curious to know why you think that they'll suddently become so much more competent if they're given a lot more work to do.

Put the damn drama llama back in the stable! Greg wasn't making jokes about children's deaths; he was commenting that these deaths were not being hidden by being misattributed to other causes or by some other subterfuge to avoid reporting them.

I knew what kind of aliens Greg was talking about. I find it repulsive how nonchalantly he accepts the death of children. He knows damn well that stricter gun control laws would lessen the number, in fact he's admitted as much, but then he retreated back into the lying position that it wouldn't.

The real reason he opposes any and all additional gun control initiatives is not because they would not work, as he dishonestly insists, but because they might inconvenience him in his ability to exercise his obsession for guns.

I'm not going to look for it, but you remember when you admitted that my proposals would work but the price in the loss of freedom would be too high. Of course you won't admit it, and naturally you've had to back off that fairly reasonable, for you, statement, but you said it.

I said that at most, your proposals would give slight reductions in some types of crimes, until the black market added guns to the many other illegal importations. The fact that violent crime of all types is down over the last several decades, though, calls into question how we'd distinguish your desires as the cause.

Who's being dense, Thomas? What you just laid out like a bumbling prosecutor is exactly what the article says. The problem is when you have a specific category like "accidents" you should not place these child deaths in the more general "homicides."

You hillbillies promote the death of children all the time. As you have said, they are just the collateral damage (deaths) of defending your 2nd amendment rights. Cold, cut, and dry. The fact that you refuse to even consider options to end some of those deaths just makes you toothless grin NRA hillbilly jack asses.

Wow! Not only does Anonymous try to paint us as deliberate killers of children, taking Jim's twisting of our statements another step further, but now a Moloch comparison.

I find it hilarious and ironic to have a statist who wants to disarm the masses accusing the proponents of liberty and small government of being the "cult of Moloch"--especially given the meaning of Moloch and the association of the cult with the power of "god-kings." Kinda shows the same cognitive dissonance that led Mike or someone here to accuse libertarians of being fascists a while back.

Actually, if you look at my comment it was aimed at the Anonymous commenter who periodically shows up and talks about dancing every time a gun owner or one of their family members is shot--whose comments indicate that HE DOES want to disarm everyone.

You claim not to want to. Jim claims to own guns, but hasn't said who he wants disarmed or why.

As for your charge about knowing the truth, it's pretty rich when your comment lies about who I was talking about--especially when my comment singled out who I was talking about. Pretty sad when most of your comments that accuse me of lying actually lie about what I just said.

There's no twist about it; your stance kills innocents, including children. When asked if you would support known steps that would lesson those needless deaths, you refuse. I'm not in the habit of replying seriously to ass hole hillbillies that lie about me. So go kill a kid, it will make you feel better.